USPTO Patents Application 09754859

United States FKtent and Trademark Office

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMENCE
United State* Patent and Trademark Officio

A(l.lr«aa: COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS
WnsJiington. D.C. 20231
Yvww.usjplo.gov

APPLICATION NO.

FILING DATE

FIRST NAM£0 INVENTOR

ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.

CONFIRMATION NO.

09/754,859

01/04/2001

Chad Daniel Fisher

2000-12

4297

7590

KoSa

4501 Charlotte Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217-1979

EXAMINER

SELLERS, ROBERT E

ART UNIT

PAPER NUMBER

1712

DATE MAILED; 08/09/2002

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application ot proceeding.

PTO-90C (Rev. 07-01)

Office' Action Summary

Application No.

09/754,859
Examiner

Robert Sellers

Applicant(s)

FISHER, CHAD DANIEL

Art Unit

1712

0 - The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondenc e address ~

Period for Reply

A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) FROM
THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION. " i j

" ^^^SS^!" available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1 .136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication ^

" If Ln^! 1 " reP ', y - PeCi,i ^ a ^°l B iS l6SS ,han thirty (30) days ' a replywithin the statutory minimum of thirty (30) days will be considered timelv

- If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX f6) MONTHS fm^» m^ii^^fT*- ■ .•

- Failure to repfy within the set or extended period for reply will, b/statute, causae app if k f SS^S^f^^cTl^ COmmUnlCa, '° n -

• SKS2 e E£S57,K" afler,he mailin9 da,e of ,his communfca,ion ' even '•^Sf-ff^ii^

Status

1)13 Responsive to communication^) filed on 20 May 2002 and 15 July 2009
2a)Q This action is FINAL. 2b)M This action is non-final.

3) Q Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is

closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1 935 C D 11 453 o G 21 3
Disposition of Claims '

4) K Claim(s) 1-23 is/are pending in the application.

4a) Of the above claim(s) 4 and 8-23 is/are withdrawn from consideration.

5) D Claim(s) is/are allowed.

6) IS Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-7 is/are rejected.

7) Q Claim(s) is/are objected to.

8) D Claim(s) are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.

Application Papers

9) D The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
10)D The drawing(s) filed on is/are: a)Q accepted or b)Q objected to by the Examiner.

Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1 .85(a).

1 !)□ The proposed drawing correction filed on is: a)Q approved b)Q disapproved by the Examiner.

If approved, corrected drawings are required in reply to this Office action.

12) D The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner.
Priority under 35 U.S.C. §§119 and 120

1 3) D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 1 1 9(a)-(d) or (f).
a)D All b)D Some*c)D None of:

1 .□ Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.

2. D Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.

3. D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Staqe
application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 1 7.2(a))

* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.

14) D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. § 1 19(e) (to a provisional application).

a) □ The translation of the foreign language provisional application has been received.

15) U Acknowledgment is made of a claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. §§ 120 and/or 121.
Attachment(s)

1)H Notice of References Cited (PTO-892) 4) □ Interview Summary (PTO-41 3) Paper No(s)

3 W IT 1- Dra n ftS P erSOn ' s c , P f ent Drawin 9 Review ( PTO -9<8> 5) □ Notice of Informal Patent Application (PTO-1^~ '

3) ESJ Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1 449) Paper No(s) . 6) □ Other:

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

PTO-326 (Rev. 04-01) Office Action Summary

Part of Paper No. 6

Application/Control Number: 09/754,859

Page 2

Art Unit: 1712

Claims 12-23 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to
37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention, there being no allowable
generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction requirement in
Paper No. 3. Claims 8-1 1 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to
37 CFR 1 .142(b) as being drawn to a non-elected invention, there being no allowable
generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in Paper No. 5. Claim 4 is
withdrawn as being directed to a non-elected species of epoxy resin.

The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that
form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:

A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -

(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public
use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United

Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by
Japanese Patent No. 10-25666.

Mixture (A) contains 1 00 parts by weight of rubber latex, from 2-1 0 parts by
weight of resorcinol-formaldehyde condensate, and from 10-20 parts by weight of epoxy
compound which converts to from 8.3% by weight (10 parts by weight of epoxy
compound per 120 combined parts by weight) to 16.4% by weight (20 parts by weight of
epoxy compound per 122 combined parts by weight) of epoxy compound.

States.

Application/Control Number: 09/754,859

Page 3

Art Unit: 1712

Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by
Mori et al.

Mori et al. (col. 9, lines 5-9 and Tables 2 and 3) shows an adhesive composition
(col. 4, lines 60-63) comprising a rubber latex, a resorcinol-formaldehyde resin, and 4%
by weight based on dry solids of sorbitol diglycidyl ether (5 parts by weight solids of
epoxy resin per 123.5 parts by weight total solids of latex, resorcinol and formaldehyde,
and epoxy compound).

The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:

(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
forth in section 1 02 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.

Claims 1-3, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Aufdermarsh, Jr., Takata et al., Imai et al. and Japanese Patent Nos. 11-286875,
9-12997, 10-46475, 2000-8280, 62-276091 and 10-212674 in view of Mori et al. and
Japanese Patent No. 10-25666.

Aufdermarsh, Jr. (col. 3, lines 49-68), Takata et al. (col. 3, line 66 to col. 4, line 8
and col. 10, lines 4-7), Imai et al. (col. 4, lines 31-53 and col. 21 , Table 6 and
lines 55-59) and the Japanese patents set forth single-dip adhesives composed of an
epoxy resin and a resorcinol-formaldehyde latex containing a rubber. The claimed
amount of epoxy resin is not recited.

Application/Control Number: 09/754,859

Page 4

Art Unit: 1712

Mori et al. (col. 2, lines 15-27 and col. 5, lines 32-42) espouses from 1.5-16% by
weight (2 parts by weight of epoxy resin/132 parts by weight of combined total solids to
20 parts by weight of epoxy resin/125 parts by weight of combined total solids) to
improve the abrasion resistance while maintaining the adhesion of the fibers to the
rubber. Japanese '666 teaches the inclusion of from 8.3-16.4% by weight
(as calculated hereinabove) of an epoxy resin for "strong adhering power."

It would have been obvious to employ the epoxy resin of Aufdermarsch, Jr.,
Takata et al., Imai et al. and Japanese '997, '475, '280, '091 and '674 in proportions
within the ranges of Mori et al. and Japanese '666 in order to improve the abrasion
resistance while maintaining the adhesion of the fibers to the rubber, and to strengthen
the adhering power.

Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Aufdermarsh, Jr., Takata et al., Imai et al. and Japanese Patent Nos. 10-25666,
1 1 -286875, 2000-8280 and 1 0-21 2674 in view of Japanese Patent Nos. 4-31 6670 and
8-13346.

The particular species of sorbitol epoxy resin of claim 5 is disclosed in column 6,
lines 1-4 and 8-1 1 of Takata et al. Japanese '670 and '346 show the adhesion of
polyester fibers with a blend of sorbitol epoxy resin and latex along with a
resorcinol-formaldehyde condensate.

Application/Control Number: 09/754,859

Page 5

Art Unit: 1712

It would have been obvious to employ the sorbitol epoxy resin of Takata et al.
and Japanese '670 and '346 as the epoxy resin of Aufdermarsh, Jr., Takata et al.,
Imai et al. and Japanese '666, '875, '280 and '674 based on the functional equivalence
of the epoxy groups emanating from the sorbitol epoxy resin which is embraced by the
generic epoxy resin of Takata et al., Imai et al. and Japanese '666, '875, '280 and '674
and its use in an equivalent utility of an adhesive for polyester or polyamide fibers
(MPEP§ 2144.08(c) and (d)).

(703) 308-2399 (Fax no. (703) 872-9310)
Monday to Friday from 9:30 to 6:00 EST

Robert Sellers
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1712

rs

8/7/02